linux-kernel - Re: III.1 - Sampling period randomization

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090622115806.GO24366@elte.hu>
Date:	Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:58:06 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	eranian@...il.com
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Maynard Johnson <mpjohn@...ibm.com>,
	Carl Love <cel@...ibm.com>,
	Corey J Ashford <cjashfor@...ibm.com>,
	Philip Mucci <mucci@...s.utk.edu>,
	Dan Terpstra <terpstra@...s.utk.edu>,
	perfmon2-devel <perfmon2-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: III.1 - Sampling period randomization

> III/ Requests
>
> 1/ Sampling period randomization
>
> It is our experience (on Itanium, for instance), that for certain
> sampling measurements, it is beneficial to randomize the sampling
> period a bit. This is in particular the case when sampling on an
> event that happens very frequently and which is not related to
> timing, e.g., branch_instructions_retired. Randomization helps
> mitigate the bias. You do not need something sophisticated. But
> when you are using a kernel-level sampling buffer, you need to
> have the kernel randomize. Randomization needs to be supported per
> event.

This is on the todo list, it should be pretty straight forward to
implement. Basically add a u64 randomize:1 flag and a u64 rand_size,
and add some noise to hwc->sample_period in perf_counter_overflow(),
just like the .freq path does.

In fact the auto-freq sampling counters effectively randomize
already, as the path of stabilization/convergence is never exactly
the same. We could add a little bit of constant noise to the freq
counter and it would auto-correct automatically.

Since you seem to care abut this sub-feature, would you be
interested in sending a patch for that? The essential steps are:

 - Take a new bit off perf_counter_attr::__reserved_1 and name
   it attr.randomize.

 - Inject a few bits of trivial noise into the period calculated
   in kernel/perf_counter.c:perf_adjust_period(). The best place
   would be to add it right before this line:

        hwc->sample_period = sample_period;

   If you add a small relative fuzz of below 1% to sample_period
   then the code will auto-correct.

 - All the tools deal just fine with variable periods already, so
   there's no tooling updates needed, beyond adding a --randomize
   flag to tools/perf/builtin-record.c.

Let us know if you need any help with any of this!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/